Archaeologia Islandica - 01.01.2006, Blaðsíða 22

OSCAR ALDRED
settlement of Iceland based its thesis on
understanding the landscape through an
ecological heritage approach as one that
combined the more common dichoto-
my of nature::culture (Bjarni Einars-
son 1995). It used the perception of the
landscape as a means of understanding
the decision-making process in colonisa-
tion and crucially, for his study, the cul-
tural identity of the colonisers, drawing
specifically on architectural typologies
along with the economic resources held
in landscape and the technologies used
to exploit them. As a study of landscape
the thesis sought to derive an alternative
tradition in archaeology, contra the ideas
that have characterised Icelandic archae-
ology before it, namely its historical tra-
dition without critical review, through a
quasi-phenomenological yet ecological
landscape hypothesis about settlement.
Whilst the landscape idea is present, it
essentially becomes the study of material
culture from one site, Granastaðir, with-
out a clear approach in the use of archae-
ological theory, especially phenomenol-
ogy. The clarity of the full implications
of the thesis after its extrapolation on the
broader landscape becomes hard to see
which partially hindered its wider appli-
cation in Iceland.
In 1989 a systematic survey
program in Iceland started that continues
today. Although these are commissioned
by local authorities in advance of strate-
gic local planning, they have attempted a
total survey of the archaeological land-
scape. The survey is a combination of
historical research, especially the first
documented date as well as the history
of a farm, contemporary local knowl-
edge and place name information and in
the field recording of visible archaeol-
ogy. This programme has stimulated the
growth of archaeology in Iceland and
provided opportunities for researchers to
create new types of archaeological prod-
ucts. Unfortunately, due to the contractual
nature of the work, there has been little
synthesis of the survey data that has been
collected over the last 15 years or so.
The archaeological information includes
opportunities to study the spatial arrange-
ments of archaeological sites against other
types of data, such as heights, land uses
and political geographies. It also has the
potential to influence the development of
heritage management applications, par-
ticularly those associated with monitor-
ing individual sites and landscapes. The
importance of the survey for landscape
work can not be overstated if landscape
research is to develop.
A number of recent and in
progress research projects have particular
emphasis on landscape within several dif-
ferent approaches. Some are area based,
or situated in themes or a combination of
both, as well as beyond the site studies.
These are the Landscape cirum landnám
project (Edwards et al 2005), the bound-
ary systems project in north-east Iceland
(Árni Einarsson et al 2002), the pre-
Christian burial (kumt) project (Krístján
Eldjárn 2000, 589-592), the Assembly
project (þingstaðir) (Adolf Friðriksson
et al 2005). Also, focused excavations at
Hólar, Skálholt, and Vatnsfjörður are all
contextualised by landscape work (Ragn-
heiður Traustadóttir and Guðný Zöega
2006; Mjöll Snæsdóttir et al 2006; Aldred
2005).
Emerging themes on the idea of
landscape in Icelandic archaeology
Landscape archaeology in Iceland has
taken a journey from an antiquarianism
closely connected to an intrinsic asso-
20